Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Every time you click this link, it will send you to a random Web 1.0 website

wiby.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 374 posts

Re: Every time you click this link, it will send you to a random Web 1.0 website

#221

Post by exodust »

3cats-in-a-coat wrote: post #103

I actually love this, and I bookmarked it. Why? Not just because of nostalgia. Web 1.0 sites had a different set of UI idioms, which seem unintuitive to us, as we're too set in our new ways now. If you get past the fact they're ugly by modern standards, you'll see these sites accomplishing amazing results through startlingly simple means. It's an excellent source of inspiration, and if you combine those ideas with mo…

> UIs in movies

And those little chirp sounds that go with the movie UIs. More than onKeyPress, they happen on every interface event. Text comes into view? chirp-bleep. Our real interfaces aren't that noisy. I wonder who drives these UI design decisions in movies, the sound people, editors, writers?

Re: Every time you click this link, it will send you to a random Web 1.0 website

#223

Post by anthk »

mighmi wrote: post #208
3cats-in-a-coat wrote: post #103

I actually love this, and I bookmarked it. Why? Not just because of nostalgia. Web 1.0 sites had a different set of UI idioms, which seem unintuitive to us, as we're too set in our new ways now. If you get past the fact they're ugly by modern standards, you'll see these sites accomplishing amazing results through startlingly simple means. It's an excellent source of inspiration, and if you combine those ideas with mo…

Old OS UIs pursued fascinating directions ours didn't keep up with, like Plan9's Acme, a 3-button-mouse-based terminal where any text in a file becomes a button and you can just type directly into toolbars, or the amazing wholesomeness of smalltalk repls. Of course, they aren't quite GUIs - but they had fascinating power.

9 front it's still alive, and if you hate the three button mice setup, you can use shift/ctrl-click to simulate the different clicks for chords. For some users using a keyboard might be easier.

Re: Every time you click this link, it will send you to a random Web 1.0 website

#224

Post by anthk »

tantalor wrote: post #80
hk__2 wrote: post #77

*A random website from a curated list of what one thinks represents “Web 1.0”. A lot of these go beyond plain HTML/CSS websites; for example I got one with a Flash game (emulated using Ruffle [1]). [1]: https://ruffle.rs/#what-is-ruffle

Web 1.0 was Flash. Web 2.0 killed it.

No, that was web 1.0 + plugins. Flash was good for media such games, but it sucked for blind people.

Re: Every time you click this link, it will send you to a random Web 1.0 website

#228

Post by s1artibartfast »

Baeocystin wrote: post #173
s1artibartfast wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I still don't believe modern we design is actually preferred by the masses. Ofen times it isn't even a balance between aesthetics an clarity, because the modern pages are broken or otherwise unusable. It has gotten to the point where I wonder if maybe I'm not neurotypical. I'll take sites formatted like Craigslist 100% of the time. Now I'm just waiting for windows OS to fully replace file navigation text with iconogr…

I think a lot of modern web design suffers from the same AB testing failures that got Pepsi into trouble back in the coke/pepsi days of the 80's. I may be misremembering the details, but the gist was that Pepsi was a bit sweeter, and so in the tiny amounts that people tasted during taste tests, they usually prefer the sweeter drink. In normal use, however, that flavor of Pepsi was too sweet, and sales tanked. I see t…

That was a thought that I had when writing my post too. Test AB testing a focus group based on a 5 Second page view Bank of radically different answer than if you sat people down and asked them to perform a typical or moderately difficult task.

If this is indeed the case, I'm just shocked that developers and companies haven't figured it out. I suppose a lot of the time the performance impact simply isn't measured in their kpis

My other hypothesis is that once you move away from an orderly website architecture, organizations and devs are just as lost as the users and no one has an idea where information should reside. Without holistic architecture or vision, the best that people can do is throw a third or fourth hamburger on the home page, add a new page 10 links deep, or not linked at all and pray that a search engine will solve the problem.

Re: Every time you click this link, it will send you to a random Web 1.0 website

#229

Post by gsinclair »

Baeocystin wrote: post #173
s1artibartfast wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I still don't believe modern we design is actually preferred by the masses. Ofen times it isn't even a balance between aesthetics an clarity, because the modern pages are broken or otherwise unusable. It has gotten to the point where I wonder if maybe I'm not neurotypical. I'll take sites formatted like Craigslist 100% of the time. Now I'm just waiting for windows OS to fully replace file navigation text with iconogr…

I think a lot of modern web design suffers from the same AB testing failures that got Pepsi into trouble back in the coke/pepsi days of the 80's. I may be misremembering the details, but the gist was that Pepsi was a bit sweeter, and so in the tiny amounts that people tasted during taste tests, they usually prefer the sweeter drink. In normal use, however, that flavor of Pepsi was too sweet, and sales tanked. I see t…

The iPads with buttons: too complicated for a whole swath of our population, or just for a small specific age range?

I wouldn’t want the take-away point from your experience there to be over-generalised.

Re: Every time you click this link, it will send you to a random Web 1.0 website

#230

Post by petepete »

IshKebab wrote: post #98
rwky wrote: post #19

It took me here https://greem.co.uk/otherbits/jelly.html Nailing jelly to a wall: is it possible? Which I think is HN worthy in its own right. Also the author of that page and I have the same toaster.

I feel like I need a more comprehensive explanation of jelly/jam. So jam is the same in both countries? What is jelly in America then?

When making them we (UK) tend to use pectin as the thickening agent for jams/marmalades and gelatin for jelly. You can buy sugar with pectin added marketed as 'jam sugar'.

Jam should be nowhere near as firm as jelly.

Post reply on HN